prime movers’ group on gas quality and h2 handling
TRANSCRIPT
Picture courtesy of Gas Connect Austria
#7 meeting, 23rd March 2021 (09:30 – 13:00 CET)
Prime movers’ group on Gas Quality and H2 handling
Online
The information included in this presentation is subject to changes. The
proposals are presented for informative purposes only since the work is
still in progress.
The organisation is not liable for any consequence resulting from the
reliance and/or the use of any information hereby provided.
Disclaimer
Agenda
Agenda
Topic Time
1. Welcome and agreement on agenda09:30 – 09:35
2. Updates on ‘Hydrogen and Gas markets Decarbonisation Package’09:35 – 10:00
3. Progress and next steps in sub-group 1) WI framework 10:00 – 11:20
Break 11:20 – 11:30
4. Re-launching survey 1B “Regulatory framework and common practices on end-uses” within SG111:30 – 11:50
5. Debrief on sub-group 2) kick-off meeting11:50 – 12:20
6. Review of goals & deliverables for 202112:20 – 12:25
7. A.O.B. & next steps for PMG12:25 – 13:00
Updates on ‘Hydrogen and Gas markets Decarbonisation Package’
− 10th February to 10th March: Inception impact assessment (i.e., roadmap) received 140 answers
− A 12-week public consultation is expected to start end March/beginning April
− A large stakeholder workshop will be organised open to all stakeholders to contribute to the impact assessment (approx. by May?)
− Commission adoption expected by Oct/Nov 2021
Gas networks - revision of EU rules on market access
Progress and next steps in sub-group 1) WI framework
CEN SFGas WG GQS - WI proposal
EC Mandate M/400 for harmonization of Gas Quality (2007)
Publication of EN 16726 (2015) without any combustion parameter
29th Madrid Forum – Oct. 2016:
− The Madrid Forum during its meeting of October 2016 encouraged
CEN “to carry on the work on finding an agreement on a band for
the Wobbe Index, elaborating on the possibility of regional bands,
to be included in an updated CEN standard [EN 16726] […]“
− “The Commission will reconsider further harmonisation activities in
light of the outcome of the CEN revision work.“
31st Madrid Forum conclusions – Oct. 2018:
− Invitation to CEN to integrate renewable and low-carbon gases in
European standard for H-gas quality
CEN SFGas WG GQS: Recommendations and considerations on Wobbe index aspects related to H-gas
LN
G
BIO
H2
Decarbonisation
Supply diversification
Production End use
Energy efficiency
Emissions standards
Gas
Qu
ality
ran
ge
Getting ready for renewable gases
Promoting gas as energy carrier
Facing competing wishes across the
network
End users’
concern on
fluctuationsEU production decline
TSOs & DSOs
Conflicting objectives & requirements over the whole
gas value chain
Recommendation for entry range
CEN SFGas WG GQS proposal on Wobbe index (2020-12-10)Prenormative work hosted in CEN from 2017 to 2021
minimum WI
[15°C/15°; MJ/m³][25°C/0°C kWh/m³]
maximum WI
[15°C/15°; MJ/m³][25°C/0°C;kWh/m³]
46.44 MJ/m³
[13,59 kWh/m³]
54.00 MJ/m³
[15,8 kWh/m³]
The WI entry range should be within 46,44 and 54,00 MJ/M³
[15°C/15°] (phrased as recommendation according CEN/CENELEC rules)
WI national specifications according to GAR Annex II and SFGas
GQS survey 1A
WI rangeWI entry range upper WI entry range lower
Enables flexibility to use
renewable and decarbonised gases
CEN SFGas WG GQS proposal on Wobbe index (2020-12-10)
ClassIndicated
WI range [MJ/m³, 15/15](Grey values 25°C/0°C)
Bandwidth of WI of distributed
gases at the exit point [MJ/m³,
15/15](Grey values 25°C/0°C)
Deviation (in percentage)(= Conclusion on percentiles)
Class specified
Lower and upper limit values defined per exit point with an
interval of 3,7 MJ/m³ [1,08
kWh/m³]
based on the distributed gas, within the WI range.
The WI of the distributed gases is ≤ 3,7 MJ/m³
[1,08 kWh/m³]
within the WI range of
46,44 MJ/m³ to 53 MJ/m³
[13,59 kWh/ m³ to 15,52 kWh/m³]
The WI of the distributed gas can fall below the lower WI limit value of the
range for a maximum of 1% of the duration of the class specification and
above the upper WI limit value of the range for another 1% of the time
Clarification of the extent/intensity of
deviation and the time distribution of the '1 % deviation' in the framework
discussion is required.
Class extended
Lower and upper limit values
defined per exit point,
based on the distributed gas, within the WI range.
Note: This class requires an
assessment (due diligence
principle) of the presence of sensitive users downstream of the
concerned exit point and, if any, the implementation of
appropriate mitigating measures.
Any other situation of WI
bandwidth and/or of the WI range
Steady/experienced situations in
class extended could be considered
similar to a class specified (e.g. after
an initial assessment) and should be
part of the framework discussion
(need to be addressed in clause 6,
framework discussion)
The WI of the distributed gas can fall below the lower WI limit value of the
range for a maximum of 1% of the
duration of the class specification and
above the upper WI limit value of the range for another 1% of the time
Clarification of the extent/intensity of deviation and the time distribution of
the '1 % deviation' in the framework discussion is required.
The distributed gases shall be classified according to Table 2 (phrased as requirement according to CEN/CENELEC rules)
Requirement for implementation of classification system at exit points based on WI of distributed gases
• more information and
certainty for end-users
• acknowledgement of
specific steady regional
situations (e.g. LNG,
national production)
Aspects of the classes and processus to be further
defined in the frameworkdiscussion → PMG SG1 « WI
Framework »
Example of exit classes with the proposed classification system
12
European legal/regulatory framework needed for the implementation fo the classification
system at exit points (aspects listed in SFGas WG GQS draft report – Clause 6)
1. The recommendation of a WI entry range:
− gives freedom to the current regional Wobbe index situations, and the future diversification of sources
including renewable and decarbonised gases, without compromising the needs of the end-users
− leaves the stipulation of the national WI entry range in the competence of the EU Member States (as it is
currently legal situation)
2. The implementation of a requirement for the WI classification system proposal at exit points:
− gives more certainty to the end-users, especially with view to the increased diversification of gases including
renewable and decarbonised gases in future.
But in order for it to work, it needs:
− a strengthened communication between the different stakeholders (producers, suppliers, network operators and
end-users) and increased information flows
− the definition of transparent methodology/framework at EU level
− a neutral party to ensure the correct implementation of the process
Key points of CEN SFGas GQS TF1 proposal
PMG Sub-group 1 work on WI regulatory framework
14
Goal and scope of Sub-group 1 “WI Framework”
Based on CEN SFGas GQS proposal, different processes were
investigated:
1. Assignation + Switching of classes
2. Identification + assessment of sensitives users
3. Identification of mitigation measures + cost/benefit analysis (CBA)
For each process, the following has been discussed and documented:
−How is the process defined? (list of aspects that defines the process,
verification of common understanding, definitions)
−When and why is the process carried out? (situation that triggers the
process)
−Who is involved in the process? (interfaces, roles, responsibility, liability)
−How is the process technically and operationally implemented?
(Communication + information flows, procedures and methodology
used, step-by-step approach)
− For which aspects a European/national framework is needed?
Ru
les
and
pro
ced
ure
s
Assignation & switching of classes
Identification & assessment of sensitive users
Identification of mitigation measures & CBA
Ro
les
and
res
po
nsa
bili
ties
Co
mm
un
icat
ion
& in
form
atio
n f
low
s
What is needed for the first assignation of classes?
Before being able to properly carry out the assignation of classes, the following items were
identified as key resources:
• Tools for forecast and network modelling
• Data on GQ (e.g., prognosis of producers, real time GQ data from the grid)
• Historical data on supply and demand
• Data on future developments (e.g., information on infrastructure planning; when and where new
injection points?)
• List of connected end-user points
− Other pre-requisites identified :
• The implementation of a transparent process and a framework where the assignation of responsibilities
and liabilities is clear
Progress in Sub-group 1: pre-requisites identified
16
Others such as: On-site adjustment of the gas appliance/application; modification/adaptation of the process; Replace/ Renew; Legal framework
Progress: Identification and analysis of mitigation measures
Topic Specific mitigation measure
GQ measurement and Data sharing
Sharing of GQ data of the gas grid
Measurement of GQ of the gas distributed to the end-consumer
Monitoring of GQ fluctuations
short term monitoring of GQ variationsForecasting of GQ
Combustion control systems
On-site fuel conditioning
Combustion control via local GQ measurement and excess oxygen
reduction of compression ratio or specific load (gas engines)
Combustion control via excess oxygen measurements Combustion system re-designFuel gas preheating
dynamics / knocking measurement and feedback loop control
Combustion control by flame ionization
Gas treatment
In producer site
Removal of higher hydrocarbons at the liquefaction train (LNG)
Further upgrading of biomethaneGas blending - Addition of LPG to bioCH4 Gas blending - Ballast of gas with N2Separation technologiesAt exit points
Topic Specific mitigation measure
Conversion between H2 and
NG gridsMethanation
Grid management (flows)
Co-mingling (continuous blending two gas flows with different GQ)
Static gradient splitterParallel pipelines
Swaping of flows
Spreading of flow variatations at IPs or at production sites
Connecting different networks to :- change flow patterns or- increase blending/mixing or- allow for injection in DSO network instead of TSO network
Reverse flowsOptimisation of flows in one pipeline
Market mitigation measures
Gas quality constraints
Refusing new injection points at that specific location
Delay new injection points at that specific location
Reduce flexibility for renominations
Demand response/balancingNo delivery of gas at exit point
Last PMG meeting (24/02) was dedicated to mitigation measures to WI/GCV & H2. SG1 gathered a non-
exhaustive list of them
work in progress
− The processes described include a potential role for the regulator/authority
− As the party in charge of ‘validating’ processes and methodologies used to ensure an
appropriate reliability and transparency of the processes (e.g., method used by network
operators to assign the classes to the exit points, to review how the processes are put in place, to
validate the updated list of ‘sensitive’* users to WI changes, etc)
− As the party that reviews the proposed mitigation measures/solutions by the network
operator and end-user in order to properly allocate costs and responsibilities
− As a ‘conflict resolution’ party between network operator and end-user when no solution is
found between them
− Who could take this role? NRAs? Other national authorities?
− The risk of not having this role fulfilled → how to ensure the well-implementation of the process?
Transparency? And trust between parties?
Progress: Potential role for the regulator/authority
*Sensitivity depends on the application/appliances. Criteria for identification of sensitive users for this process is being developed
work in progress
− To implement the necessary pre-requisites → how to ensure the appropriate tools
are in place? [e.g., ‘smart gas grids’ category under TEN-E?]
− To ensure transparency on the gas quality data and methodology used to assign
the classes: trust between parties → authority/regulator role?
− For the process and for the parties involved: Roles and responsibilities → how
can they be “enforced”?
− Ensure a level playing field among MSs → how to ensure that all MS follow the
same procedures and rules?
19
Progress: What are the ‘principles’ that would need EU regulation?work in progress
− Simulations with real data are needed in order to define the ‘1% deviation’: in intensity (MJ/m3) and frequency (days/yr). Otherwise, no agreement expected → further steps?
− Some ‘How to..’
− implement the process for residential and commercial consumers
− involve producers in assessing mitigation measures
− define ‘reasonable’ times for the communication between parties, and the assessment of mitigation measures (CBA process)
− Some ‘what if…’
− Information provided is wrong
− 1% deviation is not respected
− No agreement is found between parties
− The implementation of the process leads to ‘too many restrictions’ or boundaries for the deployment of renewable gases
− MSs apply it differently and it leads to a non-level playing field for injections and appliances
− ...
Progress: Open questions
20
work in progress
− First deliverable in April 2021
− Communication at next Madrid Forum (April 2021) expected
− Further steps to be discussed → second deliverable could be developed by mid-June 2021
Next steps for sub-group 1
dec-20 jan-21 feb-21 mar-21 apr-21 may-21 jun-21 jul-21
Sub-group 1) WI regulatory framework
= deliverable 9 meetings
Phase 1: Preparatory work
Phase 2: Reflection on the framework needs for the WI classification implementation (Clause 6)
Phase 3: Further development of recommendations
EC roadmap consultation
EC ‘gas package’ public consultation
Review of
conclusions by SG1
participants + last
meeting
work in progress
Re-launching survey 1B “Regulatory framework and common practices on end-uses” within SG1
Scope & goal
− SFGas launched survey 1b in 2018: “National situations regarding the regulatory framework on environmental in-use
requirements for gas application and maintenance practices”
− Aimed at providing an overview of relevant legislation for Emission, Efficiency, Safety and Maintenance of different
applications using natural gas in different European regions or member states.
Rational for the re-launch
− To find the appropriate solutions and framework setting for the WI process, it is important to understand the
different national situations and to facilitate the identification of areas where adaptations in the European and
national legislation/regulation could be needed to move forward the decarbonization of the whole gas value
chain
− When the survey was carried out in SFGas GQS it was probably a premature discussion which led to few answers
from the different stakeholders, therefore TF1 did not follow through with this specific survey. Meanwhile, the
context has changed and with this the awareness of the stakeholders has increased
Survey 1B “Regulatory framework and common practices on end-uses”
23
− For the re-launch it is proposed to:
1. focus the scope on a pre-defined set of applications/appliances → especially those ones that may need
“more work” for the decarbonisation (e.g., adaptations, replacements, mitigation measures, etc etc)
2. Still focus on efficiency, emissions, safety and maintenance
3. Include the population of appliances and “age”
− Proposed set of appliances:
− For residential/commercial:
− Forced draught burner (small size)
− Premix (including all condensing boilers)
− For industrial:
− Gas Turbines
− Glass melting furnaces
Survey 1B “Regulatory framework and common practices on end-uses”
24
work in progress
✓ The final deliverable will depend on the quantity and quality of the answers received. Ideally, the
analysis of the results should lead to a better understanding of MS policies and
requirements (in terms of efficiency, GHG, etc).
✓ Illustrative material (e.g., maps, tables) summarizing the main inputs received per country and
sector could help achieving this objective.
✓ SG1 participants will use this information to draw conclusions about the possibilities of
implementing the proposed WI classification system in the different sectors (especially for
the residential one).
Expected contribution to the WI process
25
✓ Definition of sub-set of appliances
▪ Definition of survey requirements
▪ JRC will support the work by implementing it in the EU survey tool in an efficient
way for further analysis of the results
▪ Engagement with targeted audience prior to survey launch
▪ Survey to be launched around April/May 2021
▪ Results expected for June 2021
Proposed work structure
26
Debrief on Sub-group 2 kick-off meeting
− 43 participants
Kick-off meeting
Topic Time
Welcome and agreement on agenda15:00 – 15:05
Context and background of subgroup 2/315:05 – 15:15
Marcogaz presentation: H2 TF work15:15 – 15:30
GERG presentation: R&D roadmap & PNR with CEN15:30 – 15:50
Update SG1) WI framework discussion15:50 – 16:00
Discussion about expectations and possibilities for SG2/316:00 – 16:30
Call of chairs and co-chairs16:30 – 16:45
Wrap-up & next steps16:45 – 17:00
Proposals for sub-group 2
− Scope & goal
− Provide conclusions that could be inputs to future Commission proposals on gas market design
− Facilitate knowledge sharing and exchange about the commonly faced challenges related to
gas quality and H2 handling, as well as best practices and lessons learned on how to overcome
them
− Identification and assessment of the possibilities for implementing gas quality & H2
management tools at different interfaces and check the feasibility of interlinking them for
decarbonised systems based on identified solutions
− Deliverable
− Common & co-developed roadmap from the whole gas value chain based on
recommendations, best practices or lessons learnt about existing and potential gas quality and
hydrogen handling options and tools and how to implement them along the different gas value
chain interfaces
− Seek to sketch out a cost-efficient ‘step-by-step’ approach to connect each individual sector or
area within a future ‘decarbonized’ gas system. Assess what can be done in the short/medium and
long-term, by trying to subdivide by end-user category what tools exist and the time horizon to
implement them
− Timeline
− Key findings and potential recommendations by Q3 2021
− What projects exist on this front? Proposal: Attempt at providing a consolidated
understanding of what is being done – deliverable for input
− In parallel – prioritize the list of potential topics that came up during previous discussion in
PMG meetings, considering:
1. the most urgent needs and requirements
2. upcoming Commission proposals
3. knowledge gaps compared to existing initiatives
Starting point…
Proposal to feed into a deliverable showing European projects –highlight issues that are being dealt with
− Map out ongoing, finished or about to start projects/initiatives/associations work related to GQ and H2 handling,
ideally within the categories/topics defined:
1. Blending/ Deblending
2. Digitalisation & smart gas grids (e.g., intelligent monitoring and metering equipment, forecast tools, sensors,
etc)
3. H2 odorisation/de-odorisation
4. H2 purity
5. H2 readiness
6. H2 safety
7. Mitigation measures for GQ variation
8. Repurposing/retrofitting
9. Reverse flows
10. Standards development
11. Others
First deliverable proposal
31
− Fields to be filled:
1. Project name
2. Stakeholders involved
3. Status (Ongoing, finished, to be started)
4. Domain (private, public, PPP)
5. Timeline
6. First key results expected by
7. Location
8. Main topic
9. H2NG?
10. Brief description: goal, added value to PMG, etc. (2 to 3 lines)
11. Link to website or relevant material
12. Additional information (e.g., how PMG could contribute or vice versa, gaps that would need further work)
First deliverable proposal
32
1. Does the issue exist or is it "upcoming“? - if the latter, when is it
expected to become an issue?
2. Which stakeholders are impacted? Are they impacted differently?
3. Is there any project/initiative/solutions already addressing this
issue? When is an outcome expected? Is the solution widely
applicable or will separate solutions be required for separate
interfaces?
Some questions remain to be answered…
More important questions that need to be answered instead?
Call for chair and co-chairs
− The call of interest for chair & co-chairs was open until 19th March
− No special requirements were asked. Only willingness to make things happen and help structure the work. Their tasks would be:
− Channel discussion
− Help structure work
− Facilitate stakeholder involvement and engagement
− The chair and co-chairs will always be supported by PMG facilitators (ENTSOG & DSOs)
− Expressions of interest received:
Ruggero Bimbatti Peter van Wesenbeeck
Review of goals & deliverables for 2021
− Goal: Provide inputs that need to be tackled by future Commission proposals in ‘gas market design’
− Expected deliverables:
− Sub-group 1 (Q1 and potentially Q2 2021):
− Recommendations for implementing the proposed WI classification system at exit points practically and in a regulatory
framework
− Sub-group 2 (Q3 2021):
− Common & co-developed ‘step-by-step’ H2 readiness roadmap for the whole gas value chain based on what could be
done in the short/medium (e.g., 2025 – 2030) and long-term (e.g., 2050) for different end-user categories or interfaces in
order to connect them in a cost-efficient way within the future ‘decarbonized’ gas system. This will involve the assessment
of existing and potential gas quality and hydrogen handling options/tools, as well as the identification of requirements
and time needed to implement them
− Transversal activities:
− Promote ongoing work and engage with stakeholders outside the prime movers’ group
− Ensure a regular exchange on latest gas quality and H2 handling practices and projects (e.g., metering, safety, H2-ready
equipment and devices, etc.)
− Coordination and alignment with other associations or WGs work on the topics
2021 goal & deliverables proposed
EC roadmap consultation
EC ‘gas package’ public consultation
2021 timeline reviewed
jan-21 feb-21 mar-21 apr-21 may-21 jun-21 jul-21 aug-21 sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21
Sub-group 1) WI regulatory framework
Sub-group 2) Value chain H2 readiness roadmap & solutions
Transversal activities
Prime movers
28 Jan
Prime movers
24 FebPrime movers
23 March
Recommendations about gas quality & H2 handling possibilities
= deliverable
Note: Timelines subject to changes
Madrid Forum
29-30 April
Commission adoption (approx.)
Potential EC
stakeholder WS
A.O.B. & next steps
Sub-group 1) WI framework
− First deliverable will be sent to SG1 for comments until mid-April
− Meeting scheduled to review comments received
− Send out to EC [DG ENER] by end April
− Further steps and work to be discussed with SG1 members and EC
Sub-group 2) Value chain H2 readiness roadmap & solutions
− Next meeting on 15th April
− SG2 participants to work on filling in the ‘initiatives & organizations work’ collection template
− Co-chairs will be appointed by SG2 participants by email
− Work structure and definition to be started with co-chairs
Overview of next steps – Wrap up
www.entsog.eu | [email protected]
ENTSOG - European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas
Avenue de Cortenbergh 100, 1000 Bruxelles
Thank you for your attention
For further questions, please contact:
Rosa Puentes ([email protected])
Thilo von der Grün ([email protected])
Nicolas Jensen ([email protected])
Leonardo D’Acquisto ([email protected])
Monica Di Pinti ([email protected])
Henning Eklund ([email protected])